Chennai Court March 1914 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
A. Kasturi Ranga Aiyar Vs. Venkatarama Aiyar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1914
Reported in: AIR1914Mad668(2); 24Ind.Cas.280
1. The High Court decree was against the assets of the deceased in the hands of his son who had been brought on as his legal representative. The term assets', if not co-extensive with, is at least included in the term 'property' and the new Section 53 says that property in the hands of a son or other descendant which is liable under Hindu Law for the payment of the debt of a deceased ancestor in respect of which a decree has been passed, shall be deemed to have come to the hands of the son or other descendant as his legal representative. Unless the debt was incurred for immoral or illegal purposes, the ancestral property of the father which passed by survivorship to the son was by this section to be deemed to be the property of the deceased father which had come to the hands of the son as his legal representative, that is to say, as soon as it got into the son's hands after the father's death it became the father's property for the purposes of Sections 50 and 52. The fact that the son ...
Chokkalinga Pillai Vs. Mahalingam Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1914
Reported in: 24Ind.Cas.383
1. The learned District Judge seems to have, in his judgment, referred rather in too casual a manner to the fact that the plaintiff did not produce the rent deed on which the first defendant (appellant before us) alleged that the payment of Rs. 525 made by him was endorsed. We cannot, however, say that his finding that the alleged payment is false is illegal because he relies on other circumstances which, in his opinion, are strongly against the said plea of payment and because he does not indicate sufficiently that he gave as much weight in defendant's favour and against plaintiff to the circumstance of plaintiff's non-production of the rent deed as we might have given to that circumstance if we had been the Judges in the Court of First Appeal.2. We dismiss the second appeal with costs as we do not think that it is really founded on any question of law....
The President, District Board, Tanjore Vs. Muthu Vaira Ambalagaran and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1914
Reported in: AIR1914Mad252; 24Ind.Cas.703
1. It is now settled law that even though the cause of action arose before the now Act came into force, if the suit is after the Act of 1908, no exchange of puttah and muchilika is necessary. [See Raja of Karvetinagar v. Pandur Govinda Mudali 21 Ind. Cas. 858 : 14 M.L.T. 535.]. We must reverse the decrees of the lower Appellate Court and remand the appeals to be disposed of according to law. The costs will abide the result....
Pattungal MoidIn Kutti Musaliar Vs. C.P. Ummayta Umma and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1914
Reported in: AIR1914Mad56; 24Ind.Cas.849
1. The question raised in this second appeal relates to the amount of compensation that the defendant is entitled to for improvements. The defendant contended that at the time of the demise to him, the rights of the previous lessee, Asser, had vested in Kathiri Kutti under a sale held in execution of a decree which Kathiri Kutti had obtained against Asser. The plaintiffs, the lessors, reserved in the demise to the defendant only the rights of Kathiri Kutti under the mortgage obtained from Asser, and the lease was executed on the footing that Kathiri Kutti had only a mortgage right then. The defendant contended that a few days after the demise to him by the plaintiffs he purchased the rights of Kathiri Kutti, that is the rights possessed by Asser under the previous lease by the plaintiffs. The defendant claims to be entitled to receive compensation not only for trees planted by him after the demise but also for any improvements for which compensation would have been due to Kathiri Kutti...
Muthu Ramakrishna Naicken Vs. Marimuthu Goundan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1914
Reported in: AIR1914Mad128; 24Ind.Cas.363; (1914)26MLJ532
Sankaran Nair, J.1. The plaintiffs sue as the legal representatives of one Mottaya Goundan to recover possession of the plaint lands from the 1st Defendant, who held them as his lessee. The lease is admitted but the main contention is that the lands belonged to Mottaya Goundan's wife, Ayyammal, from whose alleged heir, the 2nd defendant has purchased them and is now in possession. It is found by both the Courts that the properties were acquired with the profits earned by Mottaya Goundan and his wife, Ayyammal, in a trade which was carried on by both of them. Both the husband and wife were 'equally working together'. It is also stated that among the Padayachi community, to which Ayyammal and Mottaya Goundan belonged, the wife worked along with the husband 'for the purpose of the maintenance of the family and development of the family properties.' The District Munsif decided, however, that, according to the strict theory of the Hindu Smrithis even the separate property of a woman earned ...
Muthu Ramakrishna Naicken Vs. Marimuthu Goundan and anr. by their Guar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1914
Reported in: (1915)ILR38Mad1036
Sankaran Nair, J.1. The plaintiffs sue as the legal representatives of one Mottaya Goundan to recover possession of the plaint lands from the first defendant, who held them as his lessee. The lease is admitted but the main contention is that the lands belonged to Mottaya Goundan's wife, Ayyammal, from whose alleged heir, the second defendant has purchased them and is now in possession. It is found by both the Courts that the properties were acquired with the profits earned by Mottaya Goundan and his wife, Ayyammal, in a trade which was carried on by both of them. Both the husband and wife were 'equally working together.' It is also stated that among the Padayachi community, to which Ayyammal and Mottaya Goundan belonged, the wife worked along with the husband 'for the purpose of the maintenance of the family and for the preservation and development of the family properties.' The District Munsif decided, however, that, according to the strict theory of the Hindu smrithis, even the separ...
Peria Krishnasami Naik and anr. Vs. Aiyappa Naik and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1914
Reported in: AIR1915Mad227(2); 24Ind.Cas.924
Sadasiva Aiyar, J.1. The learned District Judge finds (a) that no consideration passed for the sale-deed relied on by the plaintiffs : (b) that the price mentioned in the sale-deed is not the proper price of the property sold : and (c) that no transfer of possession passed under the sale-deed and that the vendor continued in possession. We cannot interfere with these finding of fact in second appeal, though a few of the reasons given for the findings may not be satisfactory. Than the next fact the learned District Judge infers from the above three facts is that the sale-deed in the plaintiffs' favour was a sham and a colourable transaction. I do not think that we could interfere even with this inferential finding, though the learned District Judge put it too strongly when he directed himself that that is the ' inevitable inference ' from these facts. Even where similar facts existed, that inference was held not to follow in Ranga Ayyar v. Srinivasa Ayyangar 21 M. 56. because the aliene...
Sudala Muthu Moopan and ors. Vs. Sankara Narayana Aiyar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1914
Reported in: AIR1914Mad138(1); 24Ind.Cas.879
1. The only arguable question in this second appeal is whether the defendants Nos. 3 to 7 are legally entitled, to be reimbursed by the plaintiff the costs of improvements effected by them on the lands in their possession. But even this question would arise only if the defendants have proved that they did effect such improvements and if they also proved satisfactorily the value thereof.2. As we understand the judgment of the learned District Judge, he finds that the defendants Nos. 3 to 7 have not proved that they have done anything more than spending a small sum every year in the usual manuring and levelling of the lands for the purpose of husbandman like cultivation thereof and that they have not proved what they have, spent even on such usual acts.3. There is, therefore, no foundation for the second appeal which is dismissed with costs....
Sankuratri Timmayya Vs. Rajah Uppalapati Venkata Vijaya Gopalaraju Bah ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1914
Reported in: AIR1914Mad143(1); 24Ind.Cas.878
1. The District Judge acted with material irregularity in not correcting the patent arithmetical error in the calculation of the Vakil's fees and we correct that error by inserting Rs. 10 instead of Rs. 20 as the Vakil's fees due to the respondent before us in his capacity of appellant in Appeal Suit No. 113 of 1911 in the Godavari District Court. Even if Section 115, Civil Procedure Code, does not apply we think that such patent clerical or arithmetical errors committed by the lower Courts could be corrected by us under the general powers of superintendence vested in us under the Charter Act, Section 15.2. As regards the District Judge's having, awarded proportionate costs in the District Munsif's Court also, on Rs. 600 and odd, though the District Munsif awarded the Vakil's fees alone to the respondent on that amount and the respondent had not appealed to the District Court in respect of the other costs (such as process-fees, etc.) disallowed by the Munsif, the District Judge justifi...
Aleman Rama Rao Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1914
Reported in: AIR1915Mad237; 24Ind.Cas.904
Sadasiva Aiyar, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant and the Secretary of State for India in Council is the defendant (respondent) in this second appeal.2. The plaintiff applied for the darkhast grant of a certain land. This was so long ago as in 1892. The Tahsildar of Mangalore who had full authority to deal with the darkhast application and to make grant (See Board's Standing Order No. 15) referred the plaintiffs application and other similar applications to the Head Quarter Deputy Collector who, in his turn, applied for instruction to the then Acting Collector of South Canara, Mr. Vernon A. Brodie, well known as a fair-minded and sympathetic officer. Mr. Brodie, in September 1892, sent the proceedings, Exhibit L, to the Head Quarter Deputy Collector who communicated it to the Tahsildar. The proceedings under Exhibit L refer also to a petition of the plaintiff, addressed direct to the Acting Collector himself. The operative portion of the proceedings is as follows : Until it has been deci...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »